The biggest-name CEOs usually have reputations as disruptors; think Jeff Bezos, Steve Jobs, Elon Musk, Sara Blakely, and more. But when you’ve invented a smartphone or an electric car or slimming underwear, you don’t need to worry too much about whether people think you’re too disruptive; your inventions are so good that you can disrupt with impunity.
I regularly see leaders struggling to balance ‘leading’ and ‘doing.’ How much should leaders engage with employees and inspire them to produce great stuff? And how much should leaders roll up their sleeves and produce great stuff themselves? It’s the $64,000 question...
When we talk about the different kinds of leadership styles, and becoming a 100% Leader, two essential dimensions are where we want to focus: challenge and connection.
100% Leaders challenge people to grow beyond, to transform, to achieve amazing things.
You’re sitting at your desk, intensely focused on writing that big report, when you start to feel a weird tingling on the back of your neck. You try to refocus, furrowing your brow and redoubling your efforts, but you can’t shake the disquieting sense that you’re being watched. Finally, you give up and slowly turn around in your chair, sincerely hoping there’s not an ax murderer lurking behind you.
Most executives I study are driven by power or achievement (or some combination of the two). Power-driven people want to be in charge and they want authority to make decisions that will impact others. By contrast, achievement-driven people are more thrilled by accomplishing difficult tasks, even if no one else notices. 
Today’s managers talk a lot about wanting employees to be more accountable and to act on their own initiative. And yet, those same managers turn around and say to employees: “I have to give you assignments; I have to give you feedback; I have to hold you accountable.” 
Being a boss is no easy job, and it’s pretty common to wonder, “How am I really doing?” Unfortunately, traditional business metrics don’t really offer much guidance. A great P&L, for example, might be the result of leadership brilliance, but it could also be the result of the market popping up, and chances are that one leader didn’t single-handedly drive the dial up.
By now, I’m guessing everyone’s read the New York Times piece about Amazon. And you’ve no doubt tuned in to at least some of the debate about the comprehensiveness of that article. But what no one is directly talking about, and what we should be talking about, is leadership styles. How you lead is what’s really at the heart of all the buzz around this article.
